A few things kept on coming to mind while reading "Electronic Hybridity: The Persistent Processes of the Vernacular Web" by Robert Glen Howard. One of these things was the idea of class distinction, which is also the most obvious. There are two distinct classes, those, I guess the word I'm looking for would be participating, in the Institutional and those participating in the vernacular. The vernacular being in a sense the less powerful class while institutional is the dominant class. The most obvious example taken from the article would be the Kerry-Edwards Blog example. To get directly to the point, "The controversy began in July 2004, when the Kerry-Edwards Official Blog announced it was removing all links to a very popular blog named Daily Kos. On Daily Kos, a Kerry supporter named Markos Zuniga made incendiary comments about American contractors who were videotaped as they were burnt, dragged from their car, and hung on a bridge during the military conflict in Iraq. The Kerry campaign dubbed Zuniga’s comments “unpresidential language” and removed all links from Kerry’s site to Daily Kos" (p8). In this example the vernacular, on the surface anyway, appeared to have a voice and through that voice power. Unfortunatly they did not, once that voice was no longer in favor of the Institutional the links to the blog were cut. The events to follow should've and probably were foreseen, if those participating in the Vernacular could not voice themselves on that blog, they would do it on closely related blogs, and their entries would not be favoring.
To some degree this could even be compared to what James C. Scott was discussing in "Dominance and the Arts of Resistence." While it is not as drastic as the slave/master relationship, it is compareable. The idea of a blog gives people another form of that "backstage discussion" that Scott talks about. People can anonamously speak openly about what they disagree with and such.
Another idea that crossed my mind while reading the article was the idea of groups and folk. I could be wrong, but couldn't you consider those participating in their respective sides, the Vernacular and the Institituional, to be groups. Along this same line of thought, couldn't a folklorist analyze what brings these respective groups together? Even if I'm wrong and they couldn't... I'm going to do it anyway. As already stated the Vernacular (or the everyday speech of the people) is in some ways compareable to slaves or surfs, even if not to such an extreme extent. Those participating in it could be considered the less powerful of the two classes and this is probably what draws these people together to form the group. The common trait here is the idea of going against the institutional, even while your going along with it as stated in the Kerry-Edwards Blog. The institutional would be considered the more powerful class. Obviously if its a lack of power that brings the Vernacular group togetherm then it is the having of power that brings the Institutional together to form their respective groups. The Institutional, in cutting off links to certain blogs in the Kerry-Edwards example would be similar to putting down a revolt of sorts. Again, all this being not to such an extreme extent, but at its "grass roots" so to speak.
Basically, while reading the article the idea of classes crossed my mind quite often. I could be wrong in my train of thought but where there are classes, there are groups, and where there are groups there are people. (If that makes any sense...) The vernacular would be similar to the lower class while the institutional would be similar to the more powerful class. As always, it would appear the powerful are acting in the best intrest of the weak, but the Kerry-Edwards example shows that once you go against the best intrest of the strong, the powerful can easily turn on you, or away from you.
Saturday, February 28, 2009
Sunday, February 22, 2009
Whitness of Ballroom Dance
Like most people I know, when I hear Ballroom dancing I think of white, upper-class, middle-aged Americans doing an tense, uptight, slow dance of some kind. The thought of "Latin" never really crosses my mind even though it should. One of the things I found interesting was "modern genres were most often characterized by my informants as 'elegant,' 'classic,' and 'beautiful.' They were discussed as manifestations of a shared past, as dances from 'our grandparents' generation.' Again this brings up the idea of tradition and authenticity. In folklore, tradition is a huge thing. People have a tendency to cherish the past/old and almost put it on a pedestal. It gives people a shared experience, bringing groups together for a common idea. This does not just apply to ballroom dancing obviously but everything that can be considered sacred.
Honestly, the whole whiteness thing in ballroom dancing wasn't really that far off in the sense of upper-class anyone. The author even states that he had trouble keeping up with his partner financially and in turn led him to feel slightly embarrassed. It can be hierarchical. On the other hand, when I thought of "Latin" dancing I didn't really think of upper-class or middle-aged. In fact I thought of normal dancing since it is something I grew up around and am used to. Latin dancing is more intimate than "modern" but in my opinion it also has less rules. More of feeling than technique. Something that jumped out at me was how Rita states that "perhaps I was born in Brazil in another life." People identify with dance, culture and the experience of it all. Again going back to tradition, people, especially in this article, wanted to feel like they were apart of something more. For them, dance was a way of doing that. Rita identified with the performance of "Latin" music and in turn she felt as if she could have been Brazilian in another life.
Honestly, the whole whiteness thing in ballroom dancing wasn't really that far off in the sense of upper-class anyone. The author even states that he had trouble keeping up with his partner financially and in turn led him to feel slightly embarrassed. It can be hierarchical. On the other hand, when I thought of "Latin" dancing I didn't really think of upper-class or middle-aged. In fact I thought of normal dancing since it is something I grew up around and am used to. Latin dancing is more intimate than "modern" but in my opinion it also has less rules. More of feeling than technique. Something that jumped out at me was how Rita states that "perhaps I was born in Brazil in another life." People identify with dance, culture and the experience of it all. Again going back to tradition, people, especially in this article, wanted to feel like they were apart of something more. For them, dance was a way of doing that. Rita identified with the performance of "Latin" music and in turn she felt as if she could have been Brazilian in another life.
Jazz Festival Respone
Upon reading "Producing the Folk at the New Orleans Jazz and Heritage Festival" one thing that jumped out at me was the term Authenticity. The article states "In the 1960s, Allison Miner came to New Orleans in search of the authentic, and helped create a festival that reflected her own admiration for "Real Music." The idea of authenticity or even tradition for use of another word is big in folklore. Allison Miner was in search of not just any music or food or anything dealing with the festival but the real music, the real food, the authentic New Orleans Jazz and Heritage Festival. Thinking along the terms of real music I would assume she means the music from that area. The bluesy/jazzy music, not the Dave Matthews Bands or any other famous pop/rock bands. Louisiana is known predominantly for its Blues and Jazz music. In wanting to pay homage to the "real music" Allison Miner is expressing a common ideas that most of us share. One being that authenticity is in fact always better and another being that the old is sacred. She wanted to pay tribute to the "living legends" to use her words, not just listen to good music. At the Jazz and Heritage festival people are looking for more than just music or food. They are searching for a shared experience. They want to eat the authentic New Orleans food and listen to the "Real" New Orleans music. Essentially, they want to experience the real New Orleans. As already stated, the idea of authenticity and tradition are important to people, especially those who are going to the Jazz and Heritage Festival.
One other thing worth mentioning in this article isn't so much dealing with the topic but the article itself. The way both writers approach the topic and write about it. They have both been attending the festival for quite some time making it difficult for them to be objective about the topic itself. As a way of dealing with this problem they simply state as much and in fact decide to use each other as informants. This is a great way of approaching the problem simply because you know your going to be slightly bias, might as well state as much to the readers. This lets them know from the start where your coming from without making them feel as if your trying to sway the reader one way or the other.
One other thing worth mentioning in this article isn't so much dealing with the topic but the article itself. The way both writers approach the topic and write about it. They have both been attending the festival for quite some time making it difficult for them to be objective about the topic itself. As a way of dealing with this problem they simply state as much and in fact decide to use each other as informants. This is a great way of approaching the problem simply because you know your going to be slightly bias, might as well state as much to the readers. This lets them know from the start where your coming from without making them feel as if your trying to sway the reader one way or the other.
Sunday, February 8, 2009
Tradition of Advertising
Lindquist mentions alot of things in his paper about the traditions of football and how it relates to the identity of Americans as a whole. Everything from the marching band of the university paralleling the marching bands of the military to the specialization of players on the field paralleling specialization used in the American corprate world. He mentions things like how teamwork and rules are thought to help build good Americans. One thing I think Lindquist missed in his paper were the advertisments. All the commercials that play during the superbowl and such. These have become just as much a part of the tradition as the superbowl itself. In fact, I know several people who watch the superbowl for nothing more than the commercials that will air during. If you are going to say that the marching bands are tradition, that buckeye bracelets are tradition, then you have to mention the fact that the commercials themselves during the superbowl are considered tradition too.
Something else that caught my attention was the idea that football creates identity as a group. Especially college football in certain areas. I think this makes a great deal of sense, people identify with the team, they feel pain when their team loses and joy when their team wins. Not only that, but this feeling of group, of identity, can extend to the individual as well as the group as a whole. For example, look at the 40 year old man who played quarterback for his college football team. He sees that expierence in his life as part of his identity, part of who he is and was. He is the guy who played quarterback for the Buckeyes. From this he could start a tradition of his own, maybe every year on a certain day him and his family celebrate the day he won the game for his team (I'm getting entirely off track here, I know). Bringing it home, people create tradition in many ways, one of which is through their group identity. All the ohio state fans share in the traditions of Ohio State's football team.
Last thing I would like to mention is the idea that many Americans saw football as a way of bringing structure to younger americans, which is true in my opinion. Any organized sport teaches kids/younger adults to learn key concepts like playing by the rules, time management, and teamwork. Some of the things I talked about may not relate to folklore entirely, but they were brought up in the paper and I think it was a good idea to mention them.
Something else that caught my attention was the idea that football creates identity as a group. Especially college football in certain areas. I think this makes a great deal of sense, people identify with the team, they feel pain when their team loses and joy when their team wins. Not only that, but this feeling of group, of identity, can extend to the individual as well as the group as a whole. For example, look at the 40 year old man who played quarterback for his college football team. He sees that expierence in his life as part of his identity, part of who he is and was. He is the guy who played quarterback for the Buckeyes. From this he could start a tradition of his own, maybe every year on a certain day him and his family celebrate the day he won the game for his team (I'm getting entirely off track here, I know). Bringing it home, people create tradition in many ways, one of which is through their group identity. All the ohio state fans share in the traditions of Ohio State's football team.
Last thing I would like to mention is the idea that many Americans saw football as a way of bringing structure to younger americans, which is true in my opinion. Any organized sport teaches kids/younger adults to learn key concepts like playing by the rules, time management, and teamwork. Some of the things I talked about may not relate to folklore entirely, but they were brought up in the paper and I think it was a good idea to mention them.
Saturday, February 7, 2009
My Disfunctional Traditions
Honestly, the thought that this would be considered a tradition never occurred to me until recently. For starters, I have five roommates who all love to drink, I guess you could consider my home a frat house of sorts. We have several traditions but the most obvious would be how on every one of our birthdays, at midnight, we all do a shot of the worst tasting liquor we could find. This is just something we feel we have to do, no matter what, no matter where we are. On one occasion two of my roommates were in San Diego and had to be up for some meeting or another at 5am. They both felt pretty bad about not being around for the "midnight shot" and apologized several times before they left. For simplicity sake, I'm going to refer to the three of us at home as Group A and the two roommates in San Diego as Group B. So, the day before Group B leaves to San Diego I hide a small bottle of Rose Vodka (The most disgusting thing I have ever had by far) in Group B's bags. I think it was my birthday, but I don't recall. Either way, at 11:55pm Group A calls Group B and tells them about the hidden bottles and at midnight, over the phone, we all toast to the birthday and dreadfully down the shot of vodka. As bad as it was, its our tradition. It's something we have all done since we moved in together and something that we will hopefully do for many more birthdays to come, despite how far away we may be.
Another tradition is that every Monday my roommate Mark and I come home from work at around 8pm (We worked our schedules out so that neither of us will be working past 730pm on Monday, little sad when you find out why). I buy a pizza pie and he buys a six pack. We eat, hang out, and wait for 9pm to come around whereupon we sit in front of the TV and watch Heroes. This is something we do every season. It may seem like its stupid, but honestly, its the little things in life that make people happy. We celebrate the little things as much as possible.
These little traditions don't seem like much to most people, but to us it means a lot. Its things like this that makes us as close to family as can be without actually being blood related. (It also could mean we all have a drinking problem, but I choose not to look at that aspect of it...) These are the traditions that we identify with and that make us who we are as a group.
Sunday, February 1, 2009
My initial thoughts on the readings
Folklore is... a lot. My initial thought on folklore was that it was similar to mythology or legends. If my understanding is correct Folklore is the not only the category myth and legends fall into but more. According to Living Folklore, "Folklore is informally learned, unofficial knowledge about the world, ourselves, our communities,our beliefs, our cultures and our traditions, that is expressed creatively through words, music, customs, actions, behaviors and materials. It is also the interactive, dynamic process of creating, communicating, and performing as we share knowledge with other people."(p7) At first this definition really threw me off, I just thought to myself "so its anything dealing with groups of people" and quite honestly, I'm not sure if that idea has changed at all after reading everything. I can't help but view folklore as a type of anthropology, but that could just be me. In that sense, people who go into Starbucks everyday for a morning cup of coffee could be considered part of folklore. Anyone who does anything almost habitually could be folklore. Am I wrong?
According to the reading there are many groups that can classify as folklore or folk. Kids playing games in a schoolyard can be considered folk. I guess my question would be can one person doing something be considered folklore? Does it always have to be a group? Does it also always have to be informally learned? I would think a religious person going to church is not learning about their religion informally, so would you consider that a form of folklore or is it just the act of the entire family going to church every Sunday considered the folklore? I would think both going to church and everything you learn about your religion at church could be considered folklore but I can't be sure.
This may be considered a seperate topic from what I was discussing earlier but I think it is safe to say that Elliott Oring in "Folk or Lore? The Stake in Dichotomies" is strongly pushing for the idea of scientific knowledge over ethical conduct. I don't know if I would agree with the idea. I mean, honestly, it sounds extremely coldblooded. Oring states "If our questions lead to inquiry and our inquiry to conclusions- provisional though they may be as all human knowledge is- are we to respect these conclusions when we are thrust up against a situation that pits the intrests of a community against our own laboriously won knowledge" (p7)right before he goes on to complain about the actions of Barre Toelken. Toelken made a desicion, he choose ethics over science when he turned his 60+ hours of tape and research over to Yellowman's wife to be destroyed. Toelken thought it would be best in order for the Navajo to be respected. Granted, while Oring makes a good point in stating that Toelken could have looked for other options, other ways to distribute the information without disrespecting the Navajo, which could have worked, but they also could have failed. Toelken was not willing to take that chance. In all honesty it appears me that Oring is thinking much more of his own well being than in the well being of the informant. This mentality simply makes me question if I were in his position, would I be any different?
According to the reading there are many groups that can classify as folklore or folk. Kids playing games in a schoolyard can be considered folk. I guess my question would be can one person doing something be considered folklore? Does it always have to be a group? Does it also always have to be informally learned? I would think a religious person going to church is not learning about their religion informally, so would you consider that a form of folklore or is it just the act of the entire family going to church every Sunday considered the folklore? I would think both going to church and everything you learn about your religion at church could be considered folklore but I can't be sure.
This may be considered a seperate topic from what I was discussing earlier but I think it is safe to say that Elliott Oring in "Folk or Lore? The Stake in Dichotomies" is strongly pushing for the idea of scientific knowledge over ethical conduct. I don't know if I would agree with the idea. I mean, honestly, it sounds extremely coldblooded. Oring states "If our questions lead to inquiry and our inquiry to conclusions- provisional though they may be as all human knowledge is- are we to respect these conclusions when we are thrust up against a situation that pits the intrests of a community against our own laboriously won knowledge" (p7)right before he goes on to complain about the actions of Barre Toelken. Toelken made a desicion, he choose ethics over science when he turned his 60+ hours of tape and research over to Yellowman's wife to be destroyed. Toelken thought it would be best in order for the Navajo to be respected. Granted, while Oring makes a good point in stating that Toelken could have looked for other options, other ways to distribute the information without disrespecting the Navajo, which could have worked, but they also could have failed. Toelken was not willing to take that chance. In all honesty it appears me that Oring is thinking much more of his own well being than in the well being of the informant. This mentality simply makes me question if I were in his position, would I be any different?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
